Lori Drew Acquitted by Judge in Cyber Bullying Suicide Case

On July 2, a federal judge overturned guilty verdicts rendered by the jury against Lori Drew, 50, who was accused of participating in a cyber bullying scheme against 13-year-old Megan Meier, who later committed suicide. This case demonstrates why we need federal laws to stop cyber bullying, harassment and abuse.

The facts in the case were agreed upon even by Drew.  She set-up a MySpace account under an assumed name, “Josh Evans,” that was used by her daughter and an employee to harass, bully and abuse 13-year-old Megan Meier.  It is not clear what other actions Drew took to use or promote the use of the site.  After many attacks on Megan, the fake identity eventually encouraged her to commit suicide.  The three perpetrators would not admit who sent that message.

While that sounds straightforward and obviously wrong, and most people react with outrage, there are no Federal laws to prevent such attacks.  Since there are no laws making the cyber bullying, harassment and abusive actions of Lori Drew, her daughter and her employee a felony, prosecutors had to bring weak charges based on unauthorized computer access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Despite difficulties in stretching the application of these laws to cover the cyber bullying, a jury found Lori Drew guilty of three misdemeanor counts in the case.  However, the judge overturned the jury and acquitted Drew of the charges.  Some of the arguments for the defense were: * The three bullies didn’t know the terms of agreement for setting up their MySpace account because they hadn’t read the MySpace contract they agreed to. * Stretching the laws to cover their actions could set dangerous legal precedents.

Even though we can follow the legal arguments, the sense of outrage still remains.

This situation makes an obvious case for the need for strong Federal anti-cyber bullying laws. If there were clear laws and stiff penalties against, for example, using sites to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties the case against the three people would have been different.  In addition, we must not offer people anonymity or secret identities to attack other people online.

Of course these laws would infringe on free speech and some people’s desires to create secret identities online.  Which is more important, protecting adults and children against anonymous attacks or free speech?

In the case of the suicide of Megan Meier, had Lori Drew’s daughter accosted Megan in person, laying forth whatever complaints she had, saying whatever vindictive and nasty things she wanted to say, the situation would have been very different.  Megan would have been able to face her accuser.  She would have known her accuser’s personal agenda.  She could have argued or ignored the attacks.  But online attacks through a false identity are a very different matter.

Of course lawyers debate legal precedents.  But we all know the protection we’d want against anonymous people who put signs or graffiti on our homes or burn crosses on our lawns.  We clearly see the need to regulate these actions, even if they aren’t direct attacks with a deadly weapon.  Cyber bullying, harassment and abuse require the same regulation.

Lori Drew and her attorney are trying to drum up sympathy for her.  They say that she’s had to pay legal fees and move from Missouri due to the publicity and anger her family has faced.  They may not have envisioned the final consequences of their hoax, but once we go down the pathway of harassment, bullying and abuse, we can’t control the results.

As parents, this case also should make us question our children’s use of social networking sites like MySpace.  I always recommend drawing firm lines that encourage face-to-face friends and prohibit virtual friends, who, by definition, aren’t real friends.

Facebook Cyber Bullying Lawsuit Versus New York Teenager

As reported by Reid Epstein in Newsday, New York teenager, Denise Finkel has sued Facebook for $3 million because, she claims, it carried a fictitious Facebook chat group to bully, ostracize, ridicule, abuse and disgrace her.  The lawsuit states that former high school classmates, Michael Dauber, Jeffrey Schwartz, Leah Herz, and Melinda Danowitz created the chat room in which they falsely claimed that she had “inappropriate conduct with animals,” and had AIDS, as well as other sexually transmitted diseases. I want to focus on two related areas that I think are more important in the long run.

Of course there will be a lot of furor over whether any or all of the accused four did it and whether Facebook is liable for content that’s not obviously pornographic.  Did Finkel complain to Facebook and did Facebook turn a deaf ear to Finkel’s complaints?  And are the four people guilty as accused?

The first area that I think is more important in the long run is the ongoing effort to make new laws in response to new crimes, especially using new technology.  The natural way that we make new laws begins when some people commit acts not specifically covered under the old laws that have terrible consequences.  We respond by specifically labeling those new actions as crimes, and attach what we feel are appropriate criminal penalties.  Then we see, by trial-and-error, where to draw better lines.  The legal system is inevitably slow, inefficient and never perfect.

Given the increasing number of lives ruined by cyber bullying, emotional harassment and abuse, especially in schools, and the number of suicides stimulated by cyber bullying, I think that our society will make laws specifically stating that false and malicious statements and postings, in addition to pornography, are illegal.  I don’t think we’ll hold carriers like Facebook, MySpace, etc. liable for their postings.  But I think we’ll hold them liable for ignoring complaints about specific chat groups and postings that they continue to carry.

Many states and school districts, including Kansas, Oregon and California are considering such laws to protect children and teenagers from cyber bullying.

One stumbling block in making such laws is where to draw the lines and the hidden assumption that cyberbullying laws can and should be made “just right” for all situations – never too lax, never too harsh.  But the letter of the laws can never cover all situations with “just right” justice.  We always depend on human wisdom in the law’s application to specific situations.  That’s just the way it is – for better or for worse.

And I think that in this area, safety should triumph over cyber freedom.

The second area that I think is more important in the long run is parenting for the specific situations involving our kids and teenagers.  Our job is to monitor our children:

1. Do they look like they’re having a hard time (maybe being attacked by cyberbullies)?  How can we help them stop bullying on their own or do we need to intervene?
2. Are they witnessing cyber bullying and are they struggling to know whether or how to intervene?
3. Are they cyber bullies?  How do we stop them and help them develop the character to make amends and do better next time?
4. Should they even be on MySpace or Facebook or any social networking sites?  What else would be a better use of their time and energy?

And of course there are no easy answers.  No one is really dumb enough to think there are easy solutions.

There are no safe environments.  Schools and the real world have never been safe.  Schools and social networks are testing grounds for the real world.  And the real world is not and should not be safe.  Facing risks and danger helps us develop good sense, good character and the qualities necessary to survive.  Imagine growing up on a farm, in a wilderness village or in the middle ages.  Not safe.  I grew up in New York City.  Not safe.  Millennia ago we had to learn what a saber-toothed tiger’s foot prints looked like and how long ago they were left.  The world still requires survival skills, even if different ones.

Our job as parents is to teach our children the skills and grit to survive in whichever jungle or battleground they live, and to protect them when they’re over-matched.

For practical, real-world tactics designed to stop school bullies and bullying, please see “How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks,” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids.”  Individualized coaching can design action plans to fit your specific situation.  Also, the strong and clear voice of an outside speaker can empower principals, teachers and other students to stop bullying and abuse.

Rules to curb online bullying raise concerns

In his article for MSNBC, “Rules to curb online bullying raise concerns,” Alex Johnson discusses the need for laws to prevent cyberbullying and also details situations in which schools can overreact in the enforcement of those rules.  The case of teenager Avery Doninger is particularly glaring. The underlying thrust of the article is the need to create exactly the right laws that will give the right result in every situation.  Situations like the cyberbullying suicide case last year make good laws critical.

The real problem is not necessarily the law; it’s the hidden assumption that cyberbullying laws can ever be made “just right” for all situations – never too lax, never too harsh.  That assumption overlooks history and human nature.  The letter of the law can never cover all situations with “just right” justice.  We always depend on human wisdom in the law’s application to specific situations.  That’s just the way it is – for better or for worse.

Our society is in the stage of figuring out where we want to draw the lines about a new method, cyberbullying, that bullies and perpetrators use to harass, abuse and attack adults and children.  That’s our normal trial and error process.  There’s no easy answer for protecting kids online. Actually, we make laws in hopes that they’ll yield justice in, say, 95% of the cases that come up.  No matter what laws we make in any area of life, there will be specific situations in which a literal or dumb interpretation leads to an under or over-reaction.  That’s where we hope the individuals involved use good sense and good judgment.

In the case of Avery Doninger, the real question is: Is the law bad or did the school principal get defensive and over-react by not giving a second chance to a good and contrite student who learned an important lesson or is there more we don’t know about Avery?

We’re stuck with the fact that laws, by themselves, will never cover every situation, no matter where we draw the lines; whether it’s about cyberbullies, verbal bullies or physical bullies. I look carefully at the application of any law in a specific situation before rushing in to change the law.  Often the problem is in the application, not in the law itself.  That’s why we have Appeals Courts.

Separate from the general laws are the specific situations involving my kids and your kids (and adults).  My job is to monitor my children:

• Do they look like they’re having a hard time and may be being attacked by a cyberbully?  Are they having difficulty dealing with it?  How can I help them deal with it by themselves or do I need to intervene?
• Are they witnessing cyberbullying and are they struggling to know whether or how to intervene?
• Are they creating a hard time for someone else (are they cyberbullies)?  How do I stop them and help them develop the character to make amends and do better next time?
• Should they even be using MySpace or FaceBook or any social networking sites?  What else would be a better use of their time and energy?

I’m going to get my answers to those questions by observing them, talking to them and, maybe, using good software like PC Pandora to monitor what they’re doing (http://blog.pcpandora.com/2009/01/29/do-new-cyberbullying-laws-go-to-far/).

Cyberbullies and cyberbullying will be with us no matter what laws we make.  We hope the laws will help us deal effectively with most of them.

As I show in my books and CDs of case studies, “How to Stop Bullies in their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” bullies are not all the same, but their patterns of behavior, their tactics, are the same.  That’s why we can find methods to stop most of them.  If we don’t stop bullies, they’ll think we’re easy prey.  Like sharks, they’ll just go after us more.

When children and teens learn how to stop bullies in their tracks, they develop strength of character, determination, resilience and skill.  They’ll need these qualities to succeed against the real world bullies they’ll face as adults. Coaching designed for the specific situations faced by individual parents and teenagers is critical.

No easy answer for protecting kids online

A new pseudo-scientific and misleading study has been reported on by the Wall Street Journal, “No Easy Answer for Protecting Kids Online” and the New York Times, “Report Calls Online Threats to Children Overblown.” I’m sorry the headlines on this article allow people to draw the wrong conclusions, like “Threats exaggerated.”  It’s a mistake to base decisions on comparisons stating that cyberbullying isn’t much worse than other bullying.  A study that concludes that there’s no easy solution is a waste of time and money.

Of course there’s no easy solution.  No one is really dumb enough to think there’s an easy solution.  No amount of software will make the internet any safer than giving your money to Bernard Madoff or crossing the street.

Ignore the pseudo-science of the report.  Instead, pay attention to our individual kids and teach them that “friends” on social networking sites aren’t really friends, they’re merely virtual contacts; no matter how sympathetic they sound or how friendly they claim to be.  Obviously, dealing with malicious and vindictive virtual people (kids or adults) is much more difficult than dealing with people face-to-face.  And we all know how difficult that can be.

Remember the adults who encouraged a teenager to commit suicide.

Cyberbullies and predators on social networking sites are with us.  Of course we’ll find some software to help track down malicious rats and sexual predators, but we can never guarantee safety in the real world.  Striving for absolute safety is the wrong approach.

There are no safe environments.  That was the message I always got from reading the great hero stories when I was growing up.  And each tale challenged me to prepare myself for similar dangers.

Schools and the real-world have never been safe.  I remember a biography of Harpo Marx (remember the Marx Brothers).  He went to school for one day.  The kids threw him out the window (first floor).  He came back in.  They threw him out again.  After the third time he didn't go back in.  And never did again.

Schools and social networks are testing grounds for the real world.  And the real world is not and should not be safe.  Facing risks and danger helps us develop good sense, good character and the qualities necessary to survive.

Imagine growing up on a farm, in the wilderness or in the middle ages.  Not safe.  I grew up in New York City.  Not safe.  Millennia ago we had to learn what a saber-toothed tiger’s foot prints looked like and how long ago they were left.  The world still requires survival skills, even if different ones.

As parents, we have the responsibility to monitor and guide our children and teenagers.  Of course kids will object.  How many of us thought our parents were right when they tried to limit what we wanted to do?  As parents, we must be wise enough to know more about the dangers of the real world than they do and strong enough to stand up to their anger.

We must teach children how to face the real world in which they’ll meet bullies all their lives, even if our children are small and outnumbered.  That’s independent of the type of bullying – cyberbullies, physical bullying or verbal harassment or abuse.

As I show in my books and CDs of case studies, “How to Stop Bullies in their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” bullies are not all the same, but their patterns of behavior, their tactics, are the same.  That’s why we can find ways to stop most of them.

When children learn how to stop bullies in their tracks, they’ll develop strength of character, determination, resilience and skill.  They’ll need these qualities to succeed against the real world bullies they’ll face as adults.

Of course, coaching can help you design tactics that fit your specific situation.